System and method for comparing documents

ABSTRACT

The present invention relates to a system and a method for comparing information contained on at least two documents belonging to an entity. The present invention includes at least one device configured to receive information from at least one first document and at least one second document; then, compare at least one first document information and at least one second document information; and determine whether at least one second document contains at least one first document information. The present invention then outputs a result of whether the at least one second document contains at least one first document information.

CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATION(S)

This application is a continuation application of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 13/411,117, filed Mar. 2, 2012, entitled “SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR COMPARING DOCUMENTS”, which is a continuation application of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/944,615, filed Nov. 11, 2010, now U.S. Pat. No. 8,139,869, entitled “SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR COMPARING DOCUMENTS”, which is a continuation application of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 10/984,703, filed Nov. 9, 2004, now U.S. Pat. No. 7,860,318, entitled “SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR COMPARING DOCUMENTS”, all of the contents of which are incorporated herein by reference in their entireties.

TECHNICAL FIELD

The present invention generally relates to an identification system for documents. More particularly, the present invention relates to a system and method for comparing information on at least two documents. Such comparison may be performed to verify an entity's identity.

DESCRIPTION OF THE PRIOR ART

The problem of rampant and readily available fake identification documents, more particularly, driver licenses and other identification documents, has caused many retailers fines, sometimes imprisonment, loss of tobacco and liquor licenses, and has even subjected them to other forms of civil and criminal liability. Over the course of years, various attempts have been made to prevent or detect the use of fake identification documents, but not with a great deal of success. To help prevent the use of fake identification documents, motor vehicle authorities have been working on and refining a comprehensive framework of minimum requirements with recommendations to enhance and improve the security and uniformity of driver license documents in North America. These new driver licenses and other identification documents have embedded coded, or even encrypted coded information, with machine readable formats that conform to various standards.

The use of driver licenses has expanded over the years to serve as identification for various applications, such as for the purchase of alcohol, tobacco or lottery products, as well as for gambling in casinos, off-track betting (OTB), movie theaters and user-definable events, such as allowing the ingress into liquor establishments. All of these fields have an age requirement for the purchase of a product at the point-of-transaction or for ingress into an establishment and the driver license is the document used to provide age identification and all age verification is commonly accomplished in a relatively quick manner.

To prevent use of false identifications, sometimes two forms of identification are used to verify a person's identity. Such situations typically occur in government applications that require multiple forms of identification before the issuance of a government credential or ID. Upon a visual examination, the documents (e.g., a passport and a driver's license) may look identical. However, the information encoded on the documents may be different. Similarly, a cashier during a sale transaction may request a person's driver's license to verify some information on a credit card, which is used to pay for a purchase. Other situations may involve use of government and non-government identification cards in various identity verification scenarios. Thus, there is a need for a system and a method that will compare information encoded on documents in order to verify contents of the documents against each other and, hence, to verify an entity's identity.

SUMMARY

The present invention relates to a system and a method for comparing information contained on at least two documents belonging to an entity. The present invention includes at least one device configured to receive information from at least one first document and at least one second document; then, compare at least one first document information and at least one second document information; and determine whether at least one second document contains at least one first document information.

In an alternative embodiment, the present invention is a method for comparing documents on a device. The method includes steps of receiving information from at least one first document and at least one second document; comparing the information from the at least one first document to the information from the at least one second document; and determining whether the at least one second document contains the at least one first document information.

In yet another embodiment, the present invention is a method for comparing information contained on an entity's identification documents. The method includes steps of extracting information contained on the entity's identification documents; comparing information extracted from the entity's identification documents; and determining if at least one extracted information is contained on all entity's identification documents.

Further features and advantages of the invention, as well as structure and operation of various embodiments of the invention, are disclosed in detail below with reference to the accompanying drawings.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

The present invention is described with reference to the accompanying drawings. In the drawings, like reference numbers indicate identical or functionally similar elements. Additionally, the left-most digit(s) of a reference number identifies the drawing in which the reference number first appears.

FIG. 1 illustrates an exemplary method of comparing documents on a terminal device, according to the present invention.

FIG. 2 illustrates another exemplary method of comparing documents on a terminal device, according to the present invention.

FIG. 3A illustrates an exemplary apparatus for comparing documents on a terminal device, according to the present invention.

FIG. 3B illustrates another exemplary apparatus for comparing documents on a terminal device, according to the present invention.

FIG. 4 is an output screen illustrating a plurality of identification documents' information fields, according to the present invention.

FIG. 5 is an output screen illustrating a comparison between selected documents' information fields, according to the present invention.

FIG. 6 is another output screen illustrating a comparison between selected documents' information fields, according to the present invention.

FIG. 7 is yet another output screen illustrating a comparison between selected documents' information fields, according to the present invention.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

The present invention relates to a system and a method for comparing documents within a computer terminal. In an embodiment, the present invention reads information from a first document. The information can be read using a card reader, a magnetic reader; a bar code reader, a scanner or any other reader capable of obtaining information from the document. Once read, the present invention extracts the information into certain document fields. In this embodiment, the fields are first name, last name, middle initial, date of birth, social security number, driver license number, address, state of issuance of the document, date of issuance of the document, etc. As can be understood by one having ordinary skill in the relevant art, the fields and a number of them are not limited to the ones defined above.

The present invention then reads the second document in a similar fashion. The second document may belong to the same entity, which presented the first document. However, the second document is different from the first document. For example, the first document is a driver license and the second document is a passport. In another example, the first document is a credit card and the second document is a government issued identification card.

The present invention also extracts information obtained from the second document in a similar fashion as it does with the first document. Then, the present invention determines which first document fields and which second document fields contain identical or substantially identical information or type of information. For example, a first document field having “name of entity” and a second document also having the “name of entity” are compared. Similarly, other document fields can be compared. If any or all document fields in the documents contain similar information, then the present invention indicates a “match” signal. If not, then the present invention issues a “no match” signal. In an alternate embodiment, the present invention determines whether the documents contain information that is also contained on the other document. For example, a first document's name field contains the same information as is contained in a second document's name field (such as, “John Doe” is contained in the first document's name field and “John Doe” is also contained in the second document's name field).

Embodiments of the present invention are described with respect to FIGS. 1-7. FIG. 1 illustrates an embodiment of the present invention's method 100 for comparing documents on a terminal device. The method 100 is performed by a system 300 shown in FIGS. 3 a and 3 b.

Referring to FIG. 3 a, system 300 includes a document reader device 302 coupled to a terminal 310 via a connection 320. The terminal 310 further includes a display 312, processor 314 and a memory 316. The document reader device 302 can be a single device capable of retrieving information from a document. In an alternate embodiment, the document reader device 302 can be a collection of devices that retrieve information from documents. The document reader device 302 can be a bar code reader, a magnetic stripe reader, a smart card reader, a scanner, a laser reading device, a RFID device, an optical scanner or any other device capable of retrieving information contained on a document. Further, in an embodiment, a single document reader device 302 can retrieve information from various types of documents (e.g., a driver's license and a passport). In an alternate embodiment, separate document reader devices 302 can be used for retrieving information from different types of documents. The document can be a driver license, a credit card, a passport, a visa document, a green card, a government issued identification card, a non-government issued identification card, a military identification card, or any other document containing information, whether or not in a coded form. As can be understood by one having ordinary skill in the relevant art, the present invention is not limited to document reading devices as well as the types of documents described above.

Further, the connection 320 can be an electrical, electromechanical, wireless, or any other connection suitable for transferring information from the document reader device 302 to the terminal 310. The document reader device 302 can also be part of the terminal 310.

In an embodiment, the terminal 310's display 312 serves to display information relating to a read document. Some of the outputs of the display 312 are shown in FIGS. 4-7 and described below. The processor 314 processes information obtained from the read document. In an embodiment, the processor 314 performs method steps described in FIGS. 1-2 below. The processor 314 can further be coupled to the display 312 and the memory 316. After processing information received from the document reader device 302, the processor 314 can store the information in the memory 316, as well as, cause the display 312 to display the processed information. The memory 316 can be terminal's 310 permanent memory, random access memory, read only memory, or other type of storage device capable of either permanently, temporarily, or permanently and temporarily store information. The content of memory 316 can be altered by adding, deleting, or changing the stored information in any other way. The stored content can be recalled by the processor 314 and outputted on the display 312, upon request or otherwise. In an alternate embodiment, the content of the memory 316 can be password-protected.

In an alternate embodiment, as shown in FIG. 3 b, the terminal 310 can be coupled to a plurality of document reader devices N (where N is an integer) 302 via connections 320. The document reader devices 302 can be a plurality of devices such as those referred to above. Similarly, each document reader device 302 out of the plurality of document reader devices can be designed to retrieve information from multiple types of documents. Alternatively, each document reader devices can retrieve information only from a specified type of document.

Referring to FIG. 1, an exemplary embodiment of the method 100 for comparing information contained on at least two documents begins with steps 102 and 104. The two steps can be performed simultaneously or one after the other. In step 102, the document reader device 302 reads the information from a first document. In step 104, the document reader device 302 reads information from a second document. For example, the first document can be a person's driver license, which contains information about person's first name, last name (or a combination of first and last names, as well as any middle initials, suffixes, and other name designations), address, date of birth, issuing jurisdiction, eye color, hair color, and other pertinent information identifying the individual.

The second document can be a person's passport. For example, a U.S. passport includes a Machine Readable Zone (“MRZ”) in its laminated portion. The passport's MRZ typically encodes the person's first name, last name (or a combination of first and last names), date of birth, country of origin, and other relevant information. Optical Character Recognition (“OCR”) is used to retrieve information from the passport. In an embodiment, the document reader device 302 can be designed to retrieve information from a passport's MRZ using OCR.

The driver license and the passport can be passed through the document reader device 302 to gather information. In an embodiment, a single document reader device 302 can be designed to be able to retrieve information from the passport and the driver license, as well as other types of documents. In an alternate embodiment, separate document reader devices 302 can be used to retrieve information from different types of documents. By passing the documents through the document reader device 302, the information contained on the documents is detected and read by the device 302. In an embodiment, the device 302 can read the documents simultaneously. In other words, the documents can be passed through the device 302 at the same time (assuming the device 302 includes more than one reader). In an alternate embodiment, the documents can be read one after the other. In this case, the documents can be passed through different readers corresponding to different types of documents or through a single reader designed to read multiple types of documents.

The processing then proceeds to step 106. In step 106, the method 100 compares the information received from the first document to the information obtained from the second document. In the above example, the information obtained from a driver license is compared to the information obtained from an individual's passport. In an embodiment, the system 300 can compare the person's first name, last name (or a combination of first and last names), and date of birth as obtained from the driver's license and the passport. Other present invention's systems are capable of comparing an individual's middle initial/name and/or gender in addition to and/or in combination with the above information. In alternate embodiments, the documents can contain various other information that cannot be easily compared. For example, if the driver license is compared to a credit card, the credit card's number cannot be compared to any information contained of the driver license. However, the documents typically will contain person's first and last names (or a combination of first and last names), as well as his or her date of birth. As can be understood by one having ordinary skill in the relevant art, the present invention is not limited to comparison of the person's first name, last name (or a combination of the first and last names), and date of birth as stored by the documents. Other embodiments of the present invention include comparison of information relating to person's address, gender, hair color, eye color, social security number, and other information. Further, depending on the type of document and type of information stored on the document's readable medium (e.g., magnetic stripe, bar code, etc.), appropriate comparisons can be made by the system 300 using method 100.

In step 108, the system 300 determines if any of the information obtained from the first document is identical or substantially identical to the information obtained from the second document. In the example of the driver's license and the passport, the system 300 would determine if the person's first name obtained from the driver's license is identical or substantially identical to the person's first name obtained from the passport. In an embodiment, the system 300 is designed to read and compare a combination of the individual's first name, last name, middle initial, and/or any other information (e.g., gender) on the first document (e.g., driver's license) to a combination of the individual's first name, last name, middle initial, and/or any other information on the second document (e.g., passport).

Similar comparisons can be made for the person's last name and data of birth. The processor 314 is designed to read information from documents coded in various formats. For example, if the person's date of birth is stored as Oct. 1, 1946 on the driver license and the same date of birth is stored on the person's passport as Jan. 10, 1946 (assuming the date is placed first and month placed second), the system 300 would read it as Oct. 1, 1946. Likewise, the system 300 is capable of reading other information in a similar fashion.

Additionally, the system 300 can be set up so that it is able to do a partial match of the person's names. For example, if the first document has “Charles” as the person's first name and the second document has “Chuck” as the person's first name, the system can determine that the two documents contain identical information or that the documents contain each other's information in respective fields. However, for added security such comparison may be insufficient. Hence, some additional information is needed to verify person's identity based on the two documents. In embodiments requiring greater security, information obtained from the first document must be identical to the information obtained from the second document. That is, if the person's first name, last name, and date of birth are used to compare the documents, then all three must be respectively identical on both documents.

In an embodiment, in step 110, the system 300 can provide an output showing whether the information obtained from the first document is identical or substantially identical information obtained from the second document. For example, a “Match” is displayed on display 312, if the information used to compare the two documents is identical for both documents. Alternatively, the system 300 displays “Match” on the display 312, if it determines that the documents contain each other's respective information. A “No Match” is displayed on display 312, if the information is not identical. Further, if the system 300 determines that the documents does not contain information that can be compared, it displays an error signal. As can be understood by one having ordinary skill in the relevant art, other indicators can be used to determine whether the information is identical or not. In an embodiment, the indicators can include sounds, LED indicators, and other ways to determine how the information on the documents compare.

FIG. 2 illustrates another exemplary method 200 for comparing information on at least two documents, according to the present invention. Method 200 can also be performed by the system 300 shown in FIGS. 3 a and 3 b. Method 200 begins with steps 202 and 204. In steps 202 and 204, the system 300 reads information from the first and second documents, respectively. These steps are similar to steps 102 and 104, described above with respect to FIG. 1.

After steps 202 and 204, the processing proceeds to steps 206 and 208, respectively. In step 206, the system 300 extracts information from the first document. In an embodiment, the system 300 extracts person's first name, last name (or a combination of first and last names), and date of birth. In an alternate embodiment, the system 300 can extract other information that identifies the person.

Similarly, in step 208, the system 300 extracts information from the second document. As with the first document, the system 300 extracts person's first name, last name (or a combination of the first and last names), and date of birth. If other information is used to compare the documents, then system 300 extracts the appropriate information.

In an embodiment, the system 300 extracts document information into document fields. For example, the person's first name extracted from the first document is stored in a first document's first name field; the person's last name extracted from the first document is stored in a first document's last name field; and so on. The process is similar for the second document, which includes second document fields. Exemplary fields are shown in FIGS. 4-7. In an embodiment, the system 300 can read the following fields: first name, last name (or a name, i.e., a combination of first and last names), document number, issuer's information, expiration date, address, hair color, gender, eye color, weight, and others. Depending on the document type, certain information may or may not be extracted. This is because the information is either contained on the document or not. As can be seen from FIGS. 4-7, an individual driver's license contains information fields different from an individual's financial document, such as a credit card. Similar situation exists with respect to an individual's passport (FIG. 5) or military identification card (FIG. 6) or a benefit card (FIG. 7). As can be understood by one having ordinary skill in the relevant art, other documents can include various other information fields that identify the individual. The extracted information can be stored in memory 316. As stated above, the content of the memory 316 can be accessed later on.

The processing then proceeds to step 210. In step 210, the system 300 determines whether there are any common information fields between two documents. For example, if an individual's driver's license and passport are compared, then the system 300 determines that the first name, the last name, and the date of birth information fields are common to both documents. In an embodiment, a combination of the individual's first and last names can be compared. As stated above, other parameters, such as an individual's middle initial, gender, or other information can be used to compare the two documents in addition to or in combination with the above information. In another example, if an individual's driver license is compared to a credit card, then the two documents have common name information fields.

If the system 300 determines that the documents have at least one common information field or field type, e.g. the first and second documents contain first name, last name (or a combination of first and last names), and date of birth information fields, then the processing proceeds to step 212. Also, as stated above, in an embodiment, the individual's other parameters (e.g., middle initial, gender, etc.) can be compared along with the above information. In step 212, the system 300 compares the information in the common information fields. Then, in step 214, the system 300 determines whether the information contained in the common information fields of both documents is identical or substantially identical. If greater security is required, then the information must be identical. For example, if name field is common to both documents, the data contained in this field for both documents must be identical (i.e., if John Doe is contained in the first document's name field, then John Doe must be contained in the second document's name field, in order for the information to be identical). The system 300 performs this determination based on the comparison done in step 212. If the fields in the first and second documents contain identical or substantially identical information, then the system 300 can issue a signal indicating that the documents contain such information in respective document fields. For example, the system 300 can issue a “Match” signal if the documents have identical or substantially identical information in respective document fields. As stated above, depending on the desired level of security, the system can issue a “Match” signal even if the documents contain information that is partially identical. In an embodiment, this signal can be displayed on the screen 312, as shown in step 218.

However, if the document's common document fields do not have identical or substantially identical information, then the system 300 issues an alert. The alert indicates the documents do not have any identical or substantially identical information in the respective common document fields. In an embodiment, the alert can be a “No Match” signal displayed on the screen 312.

In an event, that there are no common document information fields in the documents, the system 300 issues an error signal indicating that there is no match or that there are no common information fields. This is shown in step 216 of method 200.

The system 300 is capable of performing exemplary methods 100 and 200 for multiple documents at the same time or sequentially. As can be understood by one having ordinary skill in the relevant art, the above are exemplary embodiments that do not limit the scope of the present invention.

FIGS. 4-7 illustrate comparisons between various documents, which system 300 performed.

FIG. 4 illustrates a screen output 400 showing a Master Card credit card being scanned in by the system 300. The system 300 indicates that the credit card is a financial document, shows its number, expiration date, whether it expired, and the name of the bearer. Because no other document is scanned, in the status window, the system 300 indicates that another document needs to be scanned before a comparison can be performed. Hence, one of the document columns in FIG. 4 is left blank.

FIG. 5 illustrates another screen output 500 showing a driver's license and a passport of an individual being compared by system 300. The left column of the screen output 500 indicates data obtained from the driver's license. This data was extracted into various document fields, such as: name, date of birth, address, city, document number, issue date, etc. The right column of the screen output 500 indicates data read from that individual's passport. Likewise, the data was extracted into various document fields, such as: name, document number, date of birth, expiration date, etc. Both columns also indicate types of documents. In this example, the system 300 determined that the information in the “NAME” and “DATE OF BIRTH” fields was identical on both documents. Hence, the system issued a match signal, as indicated in the status window of the screen output 500. As can be understood by one having ordinary skill in the relevant art, other types of information (e.g., gender, address, etc.) can be used to compare the above documents. In an embodiment, the data obtained the individual's driver's license is displayed in the left column, whereas other documents are displayed in the right columns.

Further, each column on the screen output has a designation type, e.g., the left column is entitled “Driver's License/ID Cards Data” and the right column is entitled “Travel/Financial Document Data.” However, as can be understood by one having ordinary skill in the relevant art, the present invention is not limited to these designations. Further, as can be understood by one having ordinary skill in the relevant art, the system in the present invention is not limited to displaying information retrieved from specific documents in either left or right columns. For example, the “Driver's License/ID Cards Data” can be placed in either right or left columns. Similar situation exists with respect to other types of documents' information.

Also, the status window may include textual and other types of indicators characterized by color, sound alert, flashing banner, text size and/or font, as well as other ways to indicate whether documents include identical or substantially identical information. For example, if the documents contain identical or substantially identical information, system 300 can display the word “MATCH” in green color as well as italicizing and bolding the word. If the system 300 determines that the documents do not include identical or substantially identical information, it can display an indicator in red, as well as, sound an alert.

FIG. 6 illustrates another screen output 600 produced by the system 300 after comparing two documents. In this example, the system 300 compared an individual's driver's license and Department of Defense document. Here, no identical or substantially identical information was found, even though common document fields existed (such as name and date of birth fields). Hence, the system 300 displayed a “NO MATCH” signal in its status window.

FIG. 7 illustrates yet another screen output 700 produced by the system 300 after comparing a benefit card and a credit card. In this example, no common identification fields that contain information were found. The benefit card, shown in the left column, contains four fields: issuing jurisdiction designation, card number, expiration date, and whether the card expired or not. The credit card, shown in the right column, contains five fields: issuing entity, card's number, expiration date, whether the card expired or not, and bearer's name. Because system 300 did not find any common document fields in the documents, it displayed an error signal indicating that there were no fields to compare. As stated above, such signal can be displayed in various colors, text size and/or font, and others. If desired, the error can be accompanied by a sound.

Further, as seen from FIGS. 4-7, the system 300 is capable of comparing entity's identification characteristics (i.e., name, date of birth, address, etc.) as well as comparing identifying biometric parameters. The biometric parameters may include entity's picture, gender, fingerprints, DNA information, blood type, eye color, hair color, weight, height, etc.

Example embodiments of the methods and components of the present invention have been described herein. As noted elsewhere, these example embodiments have been described for illustrative purposes only, and are not limiting. Other embodiments are possible and are covered by the invention. Such embodiments will be apparent to persons skilled in the relevant art(s) based on the teachings contained herein. Thus, the breadth and scope of the present invention should not be limited by any of the above-described exemplary embodiments, but should be defined only in accordance with the following claims and their equivalents. 

We claim:
 1. A system for comparing documents, the system comprising: a document reader for reading information from a first physical document and information from a second physical document; a memory storing computer executable instructions that, when executed by a processor, generate a component that: identifies a first portion of the information obtained from the first physical document and a second portion of the information obtained from the second physical document, wherein the first portion and the second portion are associated with a parameter describing a person; analyzes the first portion and the second portion so as to determine whether the first portion and the second portion are substantially identical; generates a positive indication that the first physical document matches the second physical document when the first portion and the second portion are substantially identical; and generates a negative indication that the first physical document does not match the second physical document when the first portion and the second portion are not substantially identical; and a display that presents the positive indication or the negative indication.
 2. The system of claim 1, wherein the parameter describing the person is a date of birth, and wherein analyzing the first portion with the second portion identifies a first format of the first portion and a second format of the second portion.
 3. The system of claim 1, wherein the parameter describing the person is a name, and wherein analyzing the first portion with the second portion verifies whether the first portion and the second portion represent an identical name.
 4. The system of claim 1, wherein the positive indication is presented in a different color from the negative indication.
 5. The system of claim 1, wherein the positive indication includes a first sound alert, and wherein the negative indication includes a second sound alert.
 6. The system of claim 1, wherein the component further comprises generating an error indication indicating that the first physical document and the second physical document do not have a field in common, and wherein the display presents the error indication in lieu of the positive indication or negative indication.
 7. The system of claim 6, wherein the positive indication includes a word “Match,” the negative indication includes a phrase “No Match,” and the error indication includes a phrase “No Fields To Compare”.
 8. The system of claim 6, wherein the positive indication includes a first sound alert, the negative indication includes a second sound alert, and the error indication includes a third sound alert.
 9. The system of claim 1, wherein the first physical document and the second physical document are selected from a group consisting of: a driver's license, a passport, a credit card, a benefit card, a military identification, a government issued identification, a non-government issued identification, or a bank card.
 10. A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium encoded with computer-executable instructions to cause a processor to execute a method for comparing documents, the method comprising: receiving information obtained by a document reader from a first physical document and information obtained by the document reader from a second physical document; identifying a first portion of the information obtained from the first physical document and a second portion of the information obtained from the second physical document, wherein the first portion and the second portion are associated with a parameter describing a person; analyzing the first portion and the second portion so as to determine whether the first portion and the second portion are substantially identical; generating an error indication that the first physical document and the second physical document do not have a field in common; generating a positive indication that the first physical document matches the second physical document when the first portion and the second portion are substantially identical; generating a negative indication that the first physical document does not match the second physical document when the first portion and the second portion are not substantially identical; and presenting one of the positive, negative, or error indications on an interface to a user.
 11. The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 10, wherein the parameter describing the person is a date of birth, and wherein comparing the first portion with the second portion further includes identifying a first format of the first portion and a second format of the second portion.
 12. The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 11, wherein the first physical document and the second physical document are selected from a group consisting of: a driver's license, a passport, a credit card, a benefit card, a military identification, a government issued identification, a non-government issued identification, or a bank card.
 13. The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 10, wherein the parameter describing the person is a name, and wherein comparing the first portion with the second portion further includes verifying whether the first portion and the second portion represent an identical name.
 14. The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 10, wherein the positive indication includes a word “Match,” the negative indication includes a phrase “No Match,” and the error indication includes a phrase “No Fields To Compare,” and wherein the interface is a display.
 15. The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 10, wherein the positive indication includes a first sound alert, the negative indication includes a second sound alert, and the error indication includes a third sound alert.
 16. A method for determining whether a first physical document and a second physical document identify a person, the method performed by a computing system including a processor and a memory, the method comprising: receiving information obtained by a document reader from a first physical document and information obtained by the document reader from a second physical document; identifying a first portion of the information obtained from the first physical document and a second portion of the information obtained from the second physical document, wherein the first portion and the second portion are associated with a parameter describing the person; comparing the first portion with the second portion by analyzing whether the first portion and the second portion represent the same data entry in two different forms, so as to determine whether the first portion and the second portion are substantially identical; generating an error indication that the first physical document and the second physical document do not have a field in common; generating a positive indication that the first physical document matches the second physical document when the first portion and the second portion are substantially identical; generating a negative indication that the first physical document does not match the second physical document when the first portion and the second portion are not substantially identical; and presenting one of the positive, negative, or error indications on an interface to a user.
 17. The method of claim 16, wherein the parameter describing the person is a date of birth.
 18. The method of claim 16, wherein the parameter describing the person is a name.
 19. The method of claim 16, wherein the positive indication includes a first sound alert, the negative indication includes a second sound alert, and the error indication includes a third sound alert.
 20. The method of claim 16, wherein the first physical document and the second physical document are selected from a group consisting of: a driver's license, a passport, a credit card, a benefit card, a military identification, a government issued identification, a non-government issued identification, or a bank card. 